Trump's DOJ uses "Common Use" Trap to Support Ban on Full Autos!

Published on May 12, 2025
Duration: 7:44

This video critiques the 'common use' argument used by the DOJ to justify firearm bans, particularly concerning fully automatic weapons. The speaker argues that the inverse of the 'common use' doctrine, where lack of common use implies lack of protection, is being exploited. The video emphasizes that the Bruen decision's true metric for firearm legality is historical precedent for bans, not current popularity or availability.

Quick Summary

The DOJ is exploiting the 'common use' argument to justify firearm bans, claiming that firearms not in widespread ownership are unprotected by the Second Amendment. This tactic is being used against rulings questioning the NFA. The Bruen decision emphasizes historical precedent for bans as the true legal standard, not current common use.

Chapters

  1. 00:10Introduction to the Common Use Trap
  2. 00:43The Inverse of Common Use
  3. 01:02DOJ's Strategy Against NFA Ruling
  4. 01:42Manipulating 'Common Use'
  5. 02:05Examples: SBRs, SBSs, Suppressors
  6. 02:41The Ridiculousness of the Argument
  7. 03:39Lawyer Schemes and Government Outs
  8. 04:01DOJ's Argument Against Mississippi Ruling
  9. 04:17Bruen Decision: Historical Precedent
  10. 04:51Supreme Court Inaction
  11. 05:25Stop Using the Common Use Argument
  12. 05:30Focus on Historical Precedent
  13. 05:37Citizen Rights vs. Law Enforcement/Military
  14. 06:24Why Things Aren't 'Common Use'

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the 'common use' trap in Second Amendment law?

The 'common use' trap refers to the legal argument that firearms in widespread civilian ownership are constitutionally protected. However, the inverse is also used: if a firearm is not in common use, it is argued to be unprotected by the Second Amendment, a tactic currently employed by the DOJ.

How is the DOJ using the 'common use' argument against firearm rights?

The DOJ is using the 'common use' argument to justify firearm bans by claiming that weapons like fully automatic firearms are not in common use, and therefore not protected by the Second Amendment. This is part of their effort to overturn rulings that question the constitutionality of the NFA.

What did the Supreme Court's Bruen decision establish regarding firearm bans?

The Bruen decision established that the primary metric for determining the constitutionality of a firearm ban is whether there is historical precedent for such a ban during the era of the Founding Fathers, rather than current popularity or availability.

Why should advocates stop using the 'common use' argument?

Advocates should stop using the 'common use' argument because it can be easily manipulated by the government to justify bans. The focus should shift to the lack of historical precedent for banning certain firearms, which is the true legal standard established by the Bruen decision.

Related News

All News →

More 2nd Amendment & Law Videos You Might Like

More from TheYankeeMarshal

View all →